Kantian aesthetics : the problem of personal commitment, distinction, particularity, and comparison

Kant offers a paradoxical stance about aesthetics; judgements of the beautiful are subjective yet retains universal validity. Despite the plausibility of Kant’s account, this paper showcases four limitations and argues that we are unable to refute them. First, the problem of personal commitment sugg...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Han, Li Qian
Other Authors: Dimitris Apostolopoulos
Format: Final Year Project
Language:English
Published: Nanyang Technological University 2022
Subjects:
Online Access:https://hdl.handle.net/10356/156155
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Institution: Nanyang Technological University
Language: English
id sg-ntu-dr.10356-156155
record_format dspace
spelling sg-ntu-dr.10356-1561552023-03-11T20:12:14Z Kantian aesthetics : the problem of personal commitment, distinction, particularity, and comparison Han, Li Qian Dimitris Apostolopoulos School of Humanities d.apostolopoulos@ntu.edu.sg Humanities::Philosophy Kant offers a paradoxical stance about aesthetics; judgements of the beautiful are subjective yet retains universal validity. Despite the plausibility of Kant’s account, this paper showcases four limitations and argues that we are unable to refute them. First, the problem of personal commitment suggests the infeasibility of appreciating art without some personal commitment towards artworks. Addressing this problem through free play is unsuccessful because it contradicts pre-established Kantian notions. Second, the problem of distinction arises due to dependent and free beauty functioning as two separate types of judgements as opposed to being under the same manifold. Defending Kant by interpreting dependent beauty as a sub-class of free beauty is futile because Kant did not characterise them as such. Third, the problem of particularity argues that Kant’s account is insufficient to prove that the same artwork must always produce the same aesthetic response in all individuals who encounter it under suitable circumstances. Attempting to resolve it through Anthony Savile’s account is unsuccessful because it undermines Kantian notions. Lastly, the problem of comparison highlights the inability of Kantian aesthetics to make meaningful comparative aesthetic judgements. Utilising Robert Burch’s solution is unsuccessful as it contradicts Kant’s ideal of beauty. Bachelor of Arts in Philosophy 2022-04-05T07:04:17Z 2022-04-05T07:04:17Z 2022 Final Year Project (FYP) Han, L. Q. (2022). Kantian aesthetics : the problem of personal commitment, distinction, particularity, and comparison. Final Year Project (FYP), Nanyang Technological University, Singapore. https://hdl.handle.net/10356/156155 https://hdl.handle.net/10356/156155 en application/pdf Nanyang Technological University
institution Nanyang Technological University
building NTU Library
continent Asia
country Singapore
Singapore
content_provider NTU Library
collection DR-NTU
language English
topic Humanities::Philosophy
spellingShingle Humanities::Philosophy
Han, Li Qian
Kantian aesthetics : the problem of personal commitment, distinction, particularity, and comparison
description Kant offers a paradoxical stance about aesthetics; judgements of the beautiful are subjective yet retains universal validity. Despite the plausibility of Kant’s account, this paper showcases four limitations and argues that we are unable to refute them. First, the problem of personal commitment suggests the infeasibility of appreciating art without some personal commitment towards artworks. Addressing this problem through free play is unsuccessful because it contradicts pre-established Kantian notions. Second, the problem of distinction arises due to dependent and free beauty functioning as two separate types of judgements as opposed to being under the same manifold. Defending Kant by interpreting dependent beauty as a sub-class of free beauty is futile because Kant did not characterise them as such. Third, the problem of particularity argues that Kant’s account is insufficient to prove that the same artwork must always produce the same aesthetic response in all individuals who encounter it under suitable circumstances. Attempting to resolve it through Anthony Savile’s account is unsuccessful because it undermines Kantian notions. Lastly, the problem of comparison highlights the inability of Kantian aesthetics to make meaningful comparative aesthetic judgements. Utilising Robert Burch’s solution is unsuccessful as it contradicts Kant’s ideal of beauty.
author2 Dimitris Apostolopoulos
author_facet Dimitris Apostolopoulos
Han, Li Qian
format Final Year Project
author Han, Li Qian
author_sort Han, Li Qian
title Kantian aesthetics : the problem of personal commitment, distinction, particularity, and comparison
title_short Kantian aesthetics : the problem of personal commitment, distinction, particularity, and comparison
title_full Kantian aesthetics : the problem of personal commitment, distinction, particularity, and comparison
title_fullStr Kantian aesthetics : the problem of personal commitment, distinction, particularity, and comparison
title_full_unstemmed Kantian aesthetics : the problem of personal commitment, distinction, particularity, and comparison
title_sort kantian aesthetics : the problem of personal commitment, distinction, particularity, and comparison
publisher Nanyang Technological University
publishDate 2022
url https://hdl.handle.net/10356/156155
_version_ 1761782048681361408